Re: Where is ltrim?
On 3 January 2012 11:06, Cedric Greevey cgree...@gmail.com wrote: There's a problem, though: the str-utils2/ltrim function seems to be missing. This is a breaking change for some code I'm porting from 1.2 to 1.3. Where is that function now? clojure.string/triml I believe. - James -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
Re: Where is ltrim?
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 6:11 AM, James Reeves jree...@weavejester.com wrote: On 3 January 2012 11:06, Cedric Greevey cgree...@gmail.com wrote: There's a problem, though: the str-utils2/ltrim function seems to be missing. This is a breaking change for some code I'm porting from 1.2 to 1.3. Where is that function now? clojure.string/triml I believe. Thank you. Breaking changes are bad enough without making some of them gratuitous. They could have just renamed the namespace without also renaming some of the individual functions. :) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
Re: Where is ltrim?
Hi, Am 03.01.2012 um 12:16 schrieb Cedric Greevey: Breaking changes are bad enough without making some of them gratuitous. They could have just renamed the namespace without also renaming some of the individual functions. :) One could also argue the other way around: When we break things already, we can break it really hard and also clean up inconsistent naming of functions and such. Then you have the pain of a breaking change only once. That said: I don't know whether considerations like this were the case here. Sincerely Meikel -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
Re: Where is ltrim?
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 16:09, Meikel Brandmeyer m...@kotka.de wrote: Hi, Am 03.01.2012 um 12:16 schrieb Cedric Greevey: Breaking changes are bad enough without making some of them gratuitous. They could have just renamed the namespace without also renaming some of the individual functions. :) One could also argue the other way around: When we break things already, we can break it really hard and also clean up inconsistent naming of functions and such. Then you have the pain of a breaking change only once. That said: I don't know whether considerations like this were the case here. I think you'll find that the trim/triml/trimr naming came from thread review the clojure.string code from between 2010-05-30 and 2010-06-03. The trimr/triml/trim naming has the nice property of clustering the three functions together in documentation (which tends to be sorted by name). // Ben -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
